Not, really: "We’re going to do an announcement about an A+ soon. I think it’s going to be an exciting product,” he said, without giving exact details of how the board will be upgraded.
That's all he said.
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
1) You said on multiple occasions that backwards compatibility is an important feature of C++. That feature comes at a cost, however (e.g. in language size and complexity). Do you think that at some point the cost of backward compatibility will outweigh the benefits? To put this in a context - several recent languages try to go into the system programming domain (D, Rust, Go). All quote dissatisfaction with C++ as (one of) the primary motivations (primary reasons being language complexity, poor support for parallelism, and long compile times). Can we hope the committee will be more aggressive in obsoleting old/broken features?
2) When will size_t be replaced by a signed type?
3) Your take on increased throughput of the committee and planed standardisation of many new libraries (graphics, asio, fs, etc.)
I skimmed the article and it looks like a wishful thinking of the publishers who see the writing on the wall.
The Association of American Publishers recently reported that annual growth in adult e-book sales dropped to 34 percent during the first half of 2012
So e-books are still growing and growing fast (34%!). The fact that an e-book costs as much as a paper one, has a DRM, and a delivery fee(!) is a disgrace but just imagine what will happen once those get fixed.
> It is really hard to recruit people with those skills.
Are you talking US? I'm curious if there is any demand for such people in Europe. AFAIK Europe is no longer relevant. One example: not a single mass market digital camera was produced in Europe.
I've been hearing that kind of crap for more than 10 years now and have known several startups that claimed exactly that.
Some would claim they had some cool software and you would start thinking, "oh my, how did they do it? that's truly incredible. This might be worth even more than the 200ooo$ they charge for it". The truth was that the price tag was that high so that noone could buy the software (because it was not ready yet; and in fact never materialized).
Some companies had some technology, e.g. Celoxica that did Handle-C (C variant) synthesis to FPGA. They had large offices, their employees drew BMW's but finally the bubble burst; they moved to a more modest location; and then finally sold the C synthesis business to Catalytic, a company that claimed they could synthesize MATLAB to FPGA (haha); and finally all that crap was acquired for 80(?)k $ by Mentor Graphics.
He: Let's end it all, bequeathin' our brains to science. She: What?!? Science got enough trouble with their OWN brains. -- Walt Kelly